Up the long ladder

[hux]

Watching TNG again and came across this episode

There are some very questionable things going on here. Firstly, Riker murders two people (i don't care that they're clones) if people can accuse Janeway of murdering Tuvix then what exactly is the difference here. So they stole his DNA..big deal....they were still people?

Secondly, Polaski suggests that monogamy be suspended and each man have three wives...WTF!....why doesn't she simply recommend that each woman has three artificially inseminated children....why the hell is a foursome necessary....they have the technology to clone but apparently a woman in the 24th century can't have three children by three different men without needing to adopt polygamy....that was just strange

 

[2takesfrakes]

I think Pulaski's comments might've been meant to suggest that future morals are quite different from our own. There does seem to be this attitude, and maybe it's just a product of the time these shows came out in, that clones are viewed as imitations, only. No better or different than a Holodeck character, to be dealt with in any manner that suits an actual Human, especially the host the clones were based off of.

This episode is very strange and seems as though it's referencing something else. Like there's some "inside" joke here, that you'd have to be in HOLLYWOOD to understand, or fully appreciate. In fact, this show seems to be aiming for lightness, overall - maybe even genuine comedy - but it's so awkwardly written and presented. The redhead that makes out with Riker is definitely cute, but her accent is so stereotypical, I just can't get into her. Once or twice I get a smirk because of how her character takes charge and puts her spin on everything, but if this chick's Irish then I'm a Vulcan ....

 

[Melakon]

The destroyed clones were still in a developing state, and apparently were not yet sentient, living beings. If they had been matured living things, they might then qualify as "people", and then the charge of murder might be applicable in the context of how they're presented in the episode. The issue as presented is regardless of the Mariposan's intentions of preserving their colony, DNA was extracted from Riker and Pulaski without their consent, serving as an analogy to sexual assault. There's likely an abortion reference that could drawn from the episode as well, but starting a pro or con discussion on that would take this thread completely off the rails.

The "three wives" business is mainly presented in terms that the less sophisticated Bringloidi can understand, since they're a group favoring a return to a pre-industrial society as a lifestyle. The more technologically advanced Mariposans probably would use artificial insemination to do the same thing, and gradually introduce it to the Bringloidi. Picard's idea was the two groups could learn from each other.

. . .if this chick's Irish then I'm a Vulcan ....

The actress, Rosalyn Landor, is English, born in London. Most of her work at that time was in English productions. So she might not be Irish by heritage, but it's possible she based the accent on people she knows who actually talk like that, though modified for an American audience.

I was not thrilled with the broad paintbrush used for the Bringloidi, but that's how they did it.

 

[hux]

The destroyed clones were still in a developing state, and apparently were not yet sentient, living beings. If they had been matured living things, they might then qualify as "people", and then the charge of murder might be applicable in the context of how they're presented in the episode.

So if the clones had been put into Marposan wombs, he'd still destroy them...i'm not sure...seems like a very grey area to me....i still think there's an argument to be made about Riker committing murder here

The "three wives" business is mainly presented in terms that the less sophisticated Bringloidi can understand, since they're a group favoring a return to a pre-industrial society as a lifestyle. The more technologically advanced Mariposans probably would use artificial insemination to do the same thing, and gradually introduce it to the Bringloidi. Picard's idea was the two groups could learn from each other.

But Pulaski is totally sincere in her recommendation. She makes it clear that giving up monogamy is a necessary step that needs to be taken seriously.

Pulaski - To make this work you're going to have to alter your society too. Monogamous marriage won't be possible for several generations

And the Brigloidi may be old fashioned but they're still aware of technological advances....the idea that they wouldn't comprehend the complexities of artificial insemination doesn't add up....people today would get it....and the Bringloidi are from a 22nd century culture....

I think it more likely that she made the suggestion because she felt that the Marposans needed to regain their lost sexuality and using artificial methods might discourage them from doing that...but even so, this still makes her recommendation slightly ridiculous if you ask me

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Watching TNG again and came across this episode

There are some very questionable things going on here. Firstly, Riker murders two people

No. They aren't viable yet, so it's more like an abortion. To reiterate, no. There's not even a remote parallel with the Tuvix situation.

(i don't care that they're clones) if people can accuse Janeway of murdering Tuvix then what exactly is the difference here. So they stole his DNA..big deal....they were still people?

Secondly, Polaski suggests that monogamy be suspended and each man have three wives...WTF!....why doesn't she simply recommend that each woman has three artificially inseminated children....why the hell is a foursome necessary....they have the technology to clone but apparently a woman in the 24th century can't have three children by three different men without needing to adopt polygamy....that was just strange

Actually, that's not what she says. What she says is this (emphasis mine):

PULASKI: Now if this is going to work, you're going to have to alter your society, too. Monogamous marriage will not be possible for several generations.
DANILO: I don't quite understand.
PULASKI: Thirty couples are enough to create a viable genetic base. But the broader the base the healthier and the safer the society. So it will be best if each woman, Bringloidi and Mariposan, had at least three children by three different men.

 

[hux]

I'm not fussed whether she said wives or not....it's the suggestion that they must give up monogamy that doesn't make sense

There is no reason at all to give up monogamy...it's a bizarre recommendation to make...totally incongruent

 

[2takesfrakes]

Pulaski started the 24th Century Chapter of the Mormons, that's all ...

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I'm not fussed whether she said wives or not....it's the suggestion that they must give up monogamy that doesn't make sense

There is no reason at all to give up monogamy...it's a bizarre recommendation to make...totally incongruent

The suffix -gamy of Greek origin is the same root from which the word gamete comes, and that suffix means not only having to do with marriage, but also having to do with reproduction. I don't think that it's really a stretch to apply the word monogamous in the context of reproduction, as she is clearly doing with some decorum of discretion, regardless of whether the reproduction in question is abstracted from sexual activity or not, since the word was created long before science made such abstractions possible. There's really nothing bizarre about it.

 

[Melakon]

I'm not fussed whether she said wives or not....it's the suggestion that they must give up monogamy that doesn't make sense

There is no reason at all to give up monogamy...it's a bizarre recommendation to make...totally incongruent

Well, would it have been more acceptable then, if she had said "monogamous marriage can continue, as long as you're unfaithful and have children from at least two other people"?

The objective was to increase the size of the gene pool for the colonies to continue. Faithful monogamous relationships limit the gene pool.

 

[hux]

The suffix -gamy of Greek origin is the same root from which the word gamete comes, and that suffix means not only having to do with marriage, but also having to do with reproduction. I don't think that it's really a stretch to apply the word monogamous in the context of reproduction, as she is clearly doing with some decorum of discretion, regardless of whether the reproduction in question is abstracted from sexual activity or not, since the word was created long before science made such abstractions possible. There's really nothing bizarre about it.

The Star Trek world is morally and culturally the same as ours (a flaw in itself) they continue to have traditional relationships, marriages, families etc (though they fail to address homosexuality...even though we address it in the 21st century) so the context is exactly the same as it would be today

So if i told you that you had to give up monogamy, you would understand exactly what i meant by that...you would not assume i meant specifics

Well, would it have been more acceptable then, if she had said "monogamous marriage can continue, as long as you're unfaithful and have children from at least two other people"?

The objective was to increase the size of the gene pool for the colonies to continue. Faithful monogamous relationships limit the gene pool.

I don't understand why she has to bring up monogamy at all....surely, she can just explain that each woman will need to have three children with three men...the end....no need to give up monogamy, no need to be unfaithful....just common sense applicable to their situation

So if you want, you can go get married, have kids, be faithful, whatever but at some point you'll need to be artificially impregnated two more times....doesn't necessarily mean it should affect your culture of monogamy (by which i mean our understanding of the word....which as far as i'm concerned is exactly the same as 24th century understanding)

 

[CorporalCaptain]

So if i told you that you had to give up monogamy, you would understand exactly what i meant by that...you would not assume i meant specifics

I can understand exactly what Dr. Pulaski means by what she said. By monogamy, she's referring to a single partner in reproduction. There's no great mystery, and there's nothing bizarre about it. Remember also that she's speaking in part to a group of throwbacks who still think in traditional terms.

 

[2takesfrakes]

The actress, Rosalyn Landor, is English, born in London. Most of her work at that time was in English productions. So she might not be Irish by heritage, but it's possible she based the accent on people she knows who actually talk like that, though modified for an American audience.

I was not thrilled with the broad paintbrush used for the Bringloidi, but that's how they did it.

If these people were cast as anything but caucasians, claims of racism would abound in this episode. But they're white, so ... apparently that makes it all "OK." If it had been done as "Tongue in Cheek" and done competently, this episode could've been very clever and totally memorable. But that didn't come off, I think they wanted to do more, but it didn't really come out. I'm disappointed that they didn't do a better job ...

 

[JarodRussell]

The suffix -gamy of Greek origin is the same root from which the word gamete comes, and that suffix means not only having to do with marriage, but also having to do with reproduction. I don't think that it's really a stretch to apply the word monogamous in the context of reproduction, as she is clearly doing with some decorum of discretion, regardless of whether the reproduction in question is abstracted from sexual activity or not, since the word was created long before science made such abstractions possible. There's really nothing bizarre about it.

The Star Trek world is morally and culturally the same as ours (a flaw in itself) they continue to have traditional relationships, marriages, families etc (though they fail to address homosexuality...even though we address it in the 21st century) so the context is exactly the same as it would be today

So if i told you that you had to give up monogamy, you would understand exactly what i meant by that...you would not assume i meant specifics

Well, would it have been more acceptable then, if she had said "monogamous marriage can continue, as long as you're unfaithful and have children from at least two other people"?

The objective was to increase the size of the gene pool for the colonies to continue. Faithful monogamous relationships limit the gene pool.

I don't understand why she has to bring up monogamy at all....surely, she can just explain that each woman will need to have three children with three men...the end....no need to give up monogamy, no need to be unfaithful....just common sense applicable to their situation

So if you want, you can go get married, have kids, be faithful, whatever but at some point you'll need to be artificially impregnated two more times....doesn't necessarily mean it should affect your culture of monogamy (by which i mean our understanding of the word....which as far as i'm concerned is exactly the same as 24th century understanding)

If each woman has three kids of three different men, then each man has three kids from three different women as well. And they all probably want to see their kids, and the kids want to see their parents. Does't matter if they fucked to get pregnant or if it was achieved by artificial insemination. The family relationships are not comparable to monogamy at all.

You are reducing monogamy to just having sex.

 

[The Old Mixer]

I think they wanted to do more, but it didn't really come out. I'm disappointed that they didn't do a better job ...

That could be carved on Season 2's tombstone....

 

[2takesfrakes]

Season 2 had its own set of problems, however. A writer's strike amongst them. It would've been cool to have Pulaski continue to make guest starring appearances after that rather dishy Gates McFadden came back, in Season 3. But yes, the second season wasn't completely untouched by dodgey writing and weak episodes.

 

[hux]

You are reducing monogamy to just having sex.

Yes i am, because i believe that is entirely how people understand the term

If you meet a couple who have just had a baby through surrogacy, you don't think "ah, they're a non-monogamous couple"....because you, like everyone else on the planet, associate the term with sex....I'm not completely sure why you and others are trying to convince me that the world is filled with people who don't

I get the idea that Pulaski is being scientifically accurate but if you watch the episode, she is deliberately titillating Danilo by dangling sex in front of him (even Granger finds the idea repugnant) as far as i'm concerned, there is not doubt about what she is suggesting (she's suggesting that not only do they have three children each but that they do so.....using traditional methods)

 

[CorporalCaptain]

You are reducing monogamy to just having sex.

Yes i am, because i believe that is entirely how people understand the term

If you meet a couple who have just had a baby through surrogacy, you don't think "ah, they're a non-monogamous couple"....because you, like everyone else on the planet, associate the term with sex....I'm not completely sure why you and others are trying to convince me that the world is filled with people who don't

I get the idea that Pulaski is being scientifically accurate but if you watch the episode, she is deliberately titillating Danilo by dangling sex in front of him (even Granger finds the idea repugnant) as far as i'm concerned, there is not doubt about what she is suggesting (she's suggesting that not only do they have three children each but that they do so.....using traditional methods)

Well, Pulaski did deem the cloning program to be a failure.

 

[Melakon]

If you meet a couple who have just had a baby through surrogacy, you don't think "ah, they're a non-monogamous couple"....because you, like everyone else on the planet, associate the term with sex....

Wrong. I associate the term with family relationships, not their sex lives. If I've just met these people, I'm not even thinking about how they got their baby.

People can cheat on their spouse, yet still categorize themselves as monogamous or polygamous, as the case may be. Monogamy only means you have one spouse at a time.

 

[T'Girl]

The destroyed clones were still in a developing state, and apparently were not yet sentient, living beings.

Debateably not sentient, but they were living beings, otherwise Riker could not have killed them.

DNA was extracted from Riker and Pulaski without their consent, serving as an analogy to sexual assault.

But not a sexual assault by the clones, the clones had committed no offense. Inspite of that, Riker still killed them.

I've posted before, the ethical thing for Riker to have done would have been to remove both clones to the Enterprise (perhaps with their support equipment) until as such time as they matured. Or if that proved impossible/impractical then guard them on the surface until they both "hatched," Then take them to the ship.

... Riker murders two people

No. They aren't viable yet ...

But in our modern society, when someone murders a pregnant woman, they are charged with multiple counts of murder (manslaughter, homicide, etc) for the multiple lives they ended, the women herself and the children that she was carrying. Even though the children were not yet independent of the mother, they were alive within the mother, and they were murdered.

And since the clones were apparently capable of developing into independent beings, they were in fact "viable."

... so it's more like an abortion.

Neither Riker nor Pulaski were pregnant.

The situation was far more like with Thomas Riker, Will Riker there also did not volunteer to be duplicated, but he obviously did not phaser Thomas out of existence.

 

[AgentCoop]

The situation was far more like with Thomas Riker, Will Riker there also did not volunteer to be duplicated, but he obviously did not phaser Thomas out of existence.

He didn't. But I feel like he would have if given the chance.